Imam Rauf Insists non-Muslims Must Submit to Islamic Terror

Back in January in Malaysia, churches were bombed and burned by Muslims over the use of the word "allah" by non-Muslims.

I reported the horrific story out of Malaysia, where numerous churches were burned over a court ruling that allowed a Catholic newspaper to use Allah in its Malay-language editions. Muslims rioted at mosques and set churches on fire.

I think it is critical for Americans to know how the "moderate" Imam of the Ground Zero Islamic Supremacist mosque advised the Christian community to submit to Islamic dominance, violence and terror.

Seeking harmony in Malaysia

By IMAM FEISAL ABDUL RAUF

Yes, it is true that Allah is the Arabic word for God and that Arab Christians use the word Allah when they refer to God. And yes, it is true that under freedom of speech and freedom of religion, one should be able to refer to the supreme deity any way one wants.

[....] To live harmoniously in that competition requires everyone to understand the consequences of their actions.

My message to the Christian community in Malaysia is that using the word Allah to mean the Christian God may be theologically and legally correct, but in the context of Malaysia, it is socially provocative. If you want to have influence with people in Malaysia, you must find a way to convey your message without provoking this kind of response.

If you want to reach the Malays, then use the Malay word for God, which is Tuhan.

Fire bombing churches? From the beginning of Islam, the Prophet said our faith requires us as Muslims to protect houses of worship of all other faith traditions. Islam was able to spread throughout the world, not only because of its own ideas, but also because it protected people’s rights to practise religion freely.

UPDATE: Atlas reader Paul nails it:

The statement: "... using the word Allah to mean the Christian God may be ... legally correct, but in the context of Malaysia, it is socially provocative ..." appears to Rauf to be a perfectly acceptable comment.

Why then is a statement along the lines of: "constructing a 13 story mega-mosque right next to Ground Zero may be legally correct, but in the context of New York, it is socially provocative" considered to be Islamophobic bigotry of the highest order?